I was referring to the situation in the US where the amount to be tested depends on the larger of the declarations.
In the office kitchen where I work one of the girls brought in her own bottle of soap to use by the sink for hand washing. The soap was made by a company called Morningside (http://www.morningsideproducts.com) and was labeled as 16 fl oz/ 480 mL. 16 ounces in the US is equal to 473 mL. Thus this product is 7 mL fuller then 16 ounces. Thus the test would have to be done on the 480 mL amount. But before the test can begin an extra step must be taken to determine which of the two declarations is the larger of the two. In the UK it is simple as you already stated previously. The metric amount is what counts and the supplemental description is ignored. That is the way it should be. Also with fewer and fewer of your products dual marked, there isn't a problem like in the US where every product is dual marked. Jerry ________________________________ From: Ken Cooper <k_cooper1...@yahoo.com> To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu>; jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com Sent: Friday, May 1, 2009 3:39:33 PM Subject: Re: [USMA:44942] Re: FPLA 2010 Jerry said "It must be living hell for the inspector to know what amount to test to" Not really, Jerry. Until 1994, the UK regarded dual-marked packages in the same way as the US does now i.e. it must contain the larger of the two marked quantities. Measurement was done in metric (it's a better system for average weight purposes) and compared with the larger nominal quantity. For example, if a batch of packages had been marked "1 lb 453 g" in 1993 and the average of the batch was 453.6 g, it would pass the average test.. If the average was 453.5 g, it would fail. --- On Fri, 1/5/09, Jeremiah MacGregor <jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com> wrote: From: Jeremiah MacGregor <jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com> Subject: [USMA:44942] Re: FPLA 2010 To: "U.S. Metric Association" <usma@colostate.edu> Date: Friday, 1 May, 2009, 3:25 AM But many still do. The typical 12 ounce soda can is labeled as 355 mL, which is more then 12 ounces so technically the metric declaration becomes the primary standard. The converted numbers should always be rounded up that metric then is the primary standard. It must be a living hell for an inspector to know what amount to test to. Jerry ________________________________ From: John M.. Steele <jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net> To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 6:34:13 PM Subject: [USMA:44927] Re: FPLA 2010 You are correct on how the net contents would be tested in the US; the regulations caution not to round the converted value up. --- On Thu, 4/30/09, Ken Cooper <k_cooper1...@yahoo.com> wrote: From: Ken Cooper <k_cooper1...@yahoo.com> Subject: [USMA:44924] Re: FPLA 2010 To: "U.S. Metric Association" <usma@colostate.edu> Date: Thursday, April 30, 2009, 6:18 PM Gene I think that you may have misinterpreted the directive and the national legislation of the EU members. Metric is already the primary system used for trade measurement throughout the EU (apart from the pint for draught beer & doorstep milk in a few places) In the EU, packages are required to comply with the requirements relating to their metric marking. A package marked "454 g 1 lb" would be tested to 454 g. A package marked "453 g 1 lb" would be tested to 453 g (ie the metric is always primary) As far as I am aware, US packages marked with the same indications would be tested to 454 g & to 1 lb respectively (ie to the larger of the 2 contents declarations)
